Obstetrical correlates of the first time cesarean section, compared with the repeated cesarean section

Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan

Volumn 17, Issue 10, 2007, Pages 611-614

  Qazi, Gul Rukh ^a   Akhtar, Shahnaz ^a  

^a LADY READING HOSPITAL   (Pakistan)

Author keywords

Cephalopelvic disproportion; Cesarean section; Fetal distress; First cesarean section

Indexed keywords

EID: 61449227575     PISSN: 1022386X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Tampakoudis P, Assimakopoulos E, Grimbizis G, Zafrakas M, Tampakoudis G, Mantalenakis S, et al. Cesarean section rates and indications in Greece: data from a 24-year period in a teaching hospital. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol 2004; 31: 289-292
2. Lee SI, Khang YH, Lee MS. Women's attitudes toward mode of delivery in South Korea: a society with high cesarean section rates. Birth 2004; 31:108-116
3. Lurie S. The changing motives of cesarean section: from the ancient world to the twenty-first century. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2005; 271: 281-285
4. Loverro G, Greco P, Vimercati A, Nicolardi V, Varcaccio-Garofalo G, Selvaggi L. Maternal complications associated with cesarean section. J Perinat Med 2001; 29: 322-326
5. Hammoud A, Hendler I, Gauthier RJ, Berman S, Sansregret A, Bujold E. The effect of gestational age on trial of labor after cesarean section. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2004;15:202-206
6. Wen SW, Rusen ID, Walker M, Liston R, Kramer MS, Baskett T, et al. Comparison of maternal mortality and morbidity between trial of labor and elective cesarean section among women with previous cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 191:1263-1269
7. Gonen R, Tamir A, Degani S, Ohel G. Variables associated with successful vaginal birth after one cesarean section: a proposed vaginal birth after cesarean section score. Am J Perinatal 2004; 21:447-453
8. Liang WH, Yuan CC, Hung JH, Yang ML, Yang MJ, Chen YJ, et al. Effect of peer review and trial of labor on lowering cesarean section rates. J Cbin Med Assoc 2004; 67: 281-286
9. Onion DK, Meyer DL, Wennenberg DE, Soule DN. Primary cesarean section rates in uninsured, medicaid and insured populations of predominantly rural northern, New England. J Rural Health 1999; 15:108-112
10. Parrish KM, Holt VL, Easterling TR, Connell FA, LoGerfo JP. Effect of changes in maternal age, parity, and birth weight distribution on primary cesarean delivery rates. JAMA 1994; 271: 443-447
11. Berg-Lekas ML, Hogberg U, Winkvist A. Familial occurrence of dystocia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998; 179: 117-121
12. Cecatti JG, Pires HM, Faundes A, Duarte Osis MJ. Factors associated with vaginal birth after previous cesarean section in Brazilian women. Rev Panam Salud Publica 2005; 18:107-113
13. Kraemer DF, Berlin M, Guise JM. The relationship of health care delivery system characteristics and legal factors to mode of delivery in women with prior cesarean section: a systematic review. Womens Health Issues 2004; 14: 94-103.
14. Schindl M, Birner P, Reingrabner M, Joura E, Husslein P, Langer M. Elective cesarean section vs. spontaneous delivery: a comparative study of birth experience. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2003; 82: 834-840
15. Quddusi H, Anwar S. Trial of labour after cesarean delivery: a study of 100 cases. Pak J MedRes 2005; 44: 54-56
16. Mehr-un-Nisa, Hassan L. Trend of vaginal delivery after one previous cesarean section in a tertiary care hospital. Pak J Med Res 2004; 43: 60-64
17. Harrison KA. Predicting trends in operative delivery for cephalopelvic disproportion in Africa. Lancet 1990; 335: 861-862
18. 18. Trujillo-Hernandez B, Rios-Silva M, Huerta M, Trujillo X, Vasquez C, Millan-Guerrero R. Frequency of indications for and clinical epidemiological characteristics of first-time cesarean section, compared with repeated cesarean section. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2002; 267: 27-32. (Pubitemid 36998769)
19. 19. van Bogaert LJ. Mode of delivery after one cesarean section. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2004; 87: 9-13. (Pubitemid 39349497)
20. Belizán JM, Althabe F, Barros FC, Alexander S. Rates and implications of cesarean sections in Latin America: ecological study. BMJ 1999; 319:1397-1400
21. Guihard P, Blondel B. Trends in risk factors for cesarean sections in France between 1981 and 1995: lessons for reducing the rates in the future. BJOG 2001; 108: 48-55.
22. Zanetta G, Tampieri A, Currado I, Regalia A, Nespoli A, Midwife T, et al. Changes in cesarean delivery in an Italian University Hospital, 1982- 1996: a comparison with the national trend. Birth 1999;26:144-148
23. Mesleh RA, Asiri F, Al-Naim MF Cesarean section in the primigravid. Saudi Med J 2000; 21: 957-959
24. 24. Kozinszky Z, Orvos H, Zoboki T, Katona M, Wayda K, Pal A, et at. Risk factors for cesarean section of primipara women aged over 35 years. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2002; 81: 313-316 (Pubitemid 34450618)
25. 25. Simoes E, Kunz S, Bosing-Schwenkglenks M, Schmahi FW. Occupation and risk of cesarean section: study based on the perinatal survey of Baden Wurttemberg, Germany: Arch Gynaecol Obstet 2005; 27: 338-342 (Pubitemid 40674652)
26. 26. Ben-Haroush A, Yogev Y, Bar J, Glickman H, Kaplan B, Hod M. Indicated labor induction with vaginal prostaglandin E2 increases the risk of cesarean section even in multiparous women with no previous cesarean section. J Perinat Med 2004; 32: 31-36 (Pubitemid 38292629)
27. 27. Yogev Y, Ben-Haroush A, Lahav E, Horowitz E, Hod M, Kaplan B. Induction of labor with prostaglandin E2 in women with previous cesarean section and unfavorable cervix. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2004; 116:173-176 (Pubitemid 39195129)